Cyber Nations Wiki:Great Texts/discussion/voting archives
This is archive for all votes for the featured articles: =Votes ending after 1/1/07= Cataduanes *'Yes' Problems were fixed. J Andres 20:25, 26 February 2007 (UTC) Voting Period has ended. Result: Support Sexlanta *'Yes' Alot of content, didn't notice anything wrong with it, maybe you guys will. J Andres 17:06, 23 December 2006 (UTC) *'Yes' Perhaps a little too long? Maybe split some of that out. Til then (and after then) it's still a great article. -- Mason11987 (T - - -CN) 22:02, 23 December 2006 (UTC) *'Yes' It is, right now, a great article. Aido2002((talk)) 23:46, 23 December 2006 (UTC) Voting Period has ended. Result: Support Soviet Narodnik *'No' Contains a wealth of information, but not quite yet. Maybe in another month. J Andres 17:03, 23 December 2006 (UTC) *'Yes' I think it's quite good, and I think a no vote would need more reasoning then a compliment to the article, then "not quite yet". -- Mason11987 (T - - -CN) 22:01, 23 December 2006 (UTC) *'No' Doesn't seem quite there. For one thing, I don't like how the flag protrudes the nation infobox. Aido2002((talk)) 23:48, 23 December 2006 (UTC) *:I think that's a personal style choice and doesn't really detract from the article itself. -- Mason11987 (T - - -CN) 00:24, 24 December 2006 (UTC) Voting Period has ended. Result: No Support Templuria *'No' - This article has blank sections, not great formatting, and is lacking compared to others on this list J Andres 16:49, 23 December 2006 (UTC) *'No' - Per J Andres -- Mason11987 (T - - -CN) 21:56, 23 December 2006 (UTC) *'No' Needs cleanup, I agree. Aido2002((talk)) 23:49, 23 December 2006 (UTC) Voting Period has ended. Result: No Support Politics of Templuria *'No' Some blank sections, Templuria is a better article than this and I said no to that J Andres 16:49, 23 December 2006 (UTC) *'No' - Per J Andres -- Mason11987 (T - - -CN) 21:56, 23 December 2006 (UTC) *'No' Per J Andres/Mason. Aido2002((talk)) 23:50, 23 December 2006 (UTC) Voting Period has ended. Result: No Support Templurian Military History *'No' To short to be considered great. Lack of information, bad formatting as well. J Andres 16:50, 23 December 2006 (UTC) *'No' - Per J Andres -- Mason11987 (T - - -CN) 21:56, 23 December 2006 (UTC) *'No' Per J Andres/Mason. Aido2002((talk)) 23:50, 23 December 2006 (UTC) Voting Period has ended. Result: No Support Pacific Assistance Network *'No' I think the author here went image happy. Although some of the images are useful in full size, most of them are not. J Andres 16:51, 23 December 2006 (UTC) * Not yet I also think there are too many images, specifically too many full size ones, they are bigger then the page and I'm using a 1024 resolution. I don't think images should assume the reader has a bigger res then that. That being said there isn't a lot of information, and I think the images need to have some purpose on the page and should probably be used as thumbnails with captions explaining why they need to be there. -- Mason11987 (T - - -CN) 21:58, 23 December 2006 (UTC) *'No' Not only is there too many images, but too many images that don't use thumbnails. Aido2002((talk)) 23:52, 23 December 2006 (UTC) Voting Period has ended. Result: No Support Srbija *'Yes' This is one of the best articles on this Wiki. J Andres 16:52, 23 December 2006 (UTC) *'Yes' could use some cleanup (I'll give it a go) on some parts, but even before that is a good goal for other articles to reach. -- Mason11987 (T - - -CN) 21:59, 23 December 2006 (UTC) *'Yes' It is one of the only articles to be written as well as we want them all to be. Aido2002((talk)) 23:53, 23 December 2006 (UTC) Voting Period has ended. Result: Support Wars of J Andres *'Abstain' Although I do like my article, I feel it is inappropriate for me to vote either way for it. J Andres 16:53, 23 December 2006 (UTC) ::Name changed J Andres 00:07, 24 December 2006 (UTC) *'Yes' Great use of the infoboxes in the sections, concise and interesting. All war articles should be like this. -- Mason11987 (T - - -CN) 22:03, 23 December 2006 (UTC) *'Yes' Great, but one th9ing bugs me: the name doesn't seem, in lack of a better word, proper enough. I'm not going to change it right now, but I think it should be something like Wars of J Andres. Aido2002((talk)) 23:55, 23 December 2006 (UTC) Voting Period has ended. Result: Support Grand Global Alliance *'No' This article is comprised of the charter and images. There needs to be more content for me to vote yes. J Andres 16:54, 23 December 2006 (UTC) *'No' Per J Andres (History? Actions?) -- Mason11987 (T - - -CN) 22:03, 23 December 2006 (UTC) *'No' per J Andres and Mason. Aido2002((talk)) 23:57, 23 December 2006 (UTC) Voting Period has ended. Result: No Support International Communist Party *'Maybe' I think this alliance article is good, and I will change my vote to "yes" if the charter is added. J Andres 16:55, 23 December 2006 (UTC) *'Maybe' per J Andres. -- Mason11987 (T - - -CN) 22:03, 23 December 2006 (UTC) *'No' It just doesn't seem there yet, it could be made better. Aido2002((talk)) 23:58, 23 December 2006 (UTC) Voting Period has ended. Result: No Support Serbian Knights Alliance *'No' Although this article has content, some of the sections are extremly short, which makes it look wierd. J Andres 16:56, 23 December 2006 (UTC) *'No' One sentence does not make a section, feel free to clean up then re-nominate. 22:04, 23 December 2006 (UTC) Voting Period has ended. Result: No Support Ghostovian Football Association *'No' Very little content, consists of players names and other teams. J Andres 16:56, 23 December 2006 (UTC) *'No' Per J Andres, plus images with captions without using the thumb function. -- Mason11987 (T - - -CN) 22:05, 23 December 2006 (UTC) *'No' Isn't visually or content wise too great. Aido2002((talk)) 23:47, 23 December 2006 (UTC) Voting Period has ended. Result: No Support Pilar *'Yes' This article is close to Srbija J Andres 16:57, 23 December 2006 (UTC) *'Yes' Great use of images and formatting as well. -- Mason11987 (T - - -CN) 22:06, 23 December 2006 (UTC) Voting Period has ended. Result: Support Ghostovia *'Yes' Ghostovia is lacking in the amount of content. It is very close to achieving this status, though and maybe in the future it will. (Vote changed to yes on 1/1 in response to below comment)J Andres 16:58, 23 December 2006 (UTC) *'Yes' Ghostovia was broken up into several articles (so it wasn't too long) and as is, it is quite informative, and nicely provides links to the rest of the information easily. I think you should possibly reevaluate your vote Andres. -- Mason11987 (T - - -CN) 22:07, 23 December 2006 (UTC) Voting Period has ended. Result: Support Good Cause, or NPO slanderer? *'No' It doesn't even cover the event well. J Andres 17:01, 23 December 2006 (UTC) *'No' Per J Andres, and bad formatting. I don't really approve of interview style, seems unwiki-like and POV-ish to me, unless the article is about an interview, then the interview shoudl appear unaltered. -- Mason11987 (T - - -CN) 22:08, 23 December 2006 (UTC) *'Strong No' Well, this is why I want a "News:" namespace. I agree with Mason, it is un-wiki-like, etc. In fact, I would go so far to say that it should be deleted for these reasons. Aido2002((talk)) 00:00, 24 December 2006 (UTC) *:Eh, contact the writer and suggest a change to the style of *insert similar event-related article here*. -- Mason11987 (T - - -CN) 00:26, 24 December 2006 (UTC) Voting Period has ended. Result: No Support Wyfind *'No' Similar to Ghostovia not yet, but maybe in a few months. Although this have formating problems too. J Andres 17:02, 23 December 2006 (UTC) *'Yes' I think the style and content are good targets for other articles to go for. -- Mason11987 (T - - -CN) 22:08, 23 December 2006 (UTC) *'Yes' Seems ready. Aido2002((talk)) 00:02, 24 December 2006 (UTC) Voting Period has ended. Result: Support Nova Rio *Adding here for discussion, holding out on voting til I can get a chance to read it. -- Mason11987 (T - - -CN) 21:20, 29 December 2006 (UTC) I hate to be pushy, but it's been almost a week... I'm just anxious. MTTezla 20:56, 4 January 2007 (UTC) :Yes Lots of great content on the page, and the stuff that would have made the article too bulky is on separate pages which are linked to easily. -- Mason11987 (T - - -CN) 15:01, 9 January 2007 (UTC) :Yes After finally getting around to reading it, I support this article. J Andres 19:12, 9 January 2007 (UTC) Er... again, I hate to be pushy, but do I get a banner or something now? Or are we waiting for another vote? Sorry, again. MTTezla 14:53, 17 January 2007 (UTC) Voting Period has ended. Result: Support =Pre Defenition of Great Article Votes= Pilar * pro - think of it as featured article worthy. Good written nicely formatted. I agree with proposal. Whisperer 23:11, 13 November 2006 (UTC) *'pro' - I proposed it, so I agree with it... J Andres 00:46, 14 November 2006 (UTC) * Pro - Simply great. You can see some hard work in there *applauds* stefanmg 14:55, 17 November 2006 (UTC) Ghostovia * pro - Well isn't it obvious why. Whisperer 20:19, 17 November 2006 (UTC) *'pro' - Lots of decent updates recently J Andres 12:21, 18 November 2006 (UTC) *'pro' - I agree with Andres and I know how hard Ghost worked on it. stefanmg 13:58, 19 November 2006 (UTC) Sexlanta *'pro' This article is very well written, the pictures should be made into thumbs so the text is aligned better, but this can easily be fixed. Full Support J Andres 13:45, 19 November 2006 (UTC) *'pro' Well it is now OK. Whisperer 13:18, 21 November 2006 (UTC) (So what do we have to wait on here, because I think I posted this like two weeks ago?...) *'pro' Very good article. When will we add it? stefanmg 14:07, 9 December 2006 (UTC) Soviet Narodnik *'pro' I think this article is well done. I think it still has room for expansion, but it compares to others on the list. J Andres 00:40, 21 November 2006 (UTC)